Government-regulated privatisation would be best, no? The UK government sucks at regulation hence why everything that was once cheap before privatisation is now darn expensive and poor value for money. If the state ran a poor service they can just say they'll give it away but not say anything about how they'll maintain a good value service because the state never did such.

It can be great in certain industries/markets. Competition due to profit motive which lowers prices and improves the product. However when the state gets involved you can get corruption/collusion between corporation and state, leading to monopolies etc.

We need water to drink . We need heat to stay warm . The price of this depends on where you live in this country .
It depends on how unscrupulous and determined the private company is to squeeze every last pound out of pockets that are least able to pay . Since the advent of private water companies and utility companies prices have rocketed to unprecedented levels . In the course of my business I visit many elderly people and those on the bottom rung of societies ladder . What I see appalls me . Empty cupboards , electricity dis-connected and many wrapped up in sleeping bags and blankets . I see kids going to school early for a free breakfast because parents cannot afford to buy enough food . Over 20% of families are living at or well below the poverty line . Food banks are now in every town in the country and many people are absolutely destitute .

So ....is Privatisisation a good thing ?

Yes , is the answer , especially if you have shares in them or happen to work for one .

(Original post by L i b)
Transport to work, food to eat, homes to live in, places to socialise...

Presumably you think we should be nationalising Sainsbury's and car production.

So has investment, water cleanliness, network pressure, level of service (ie, avoiding the water supply being cut off to homes), efficiency (in terms of wasted water) and so on.

You can look at water charges in parts of the UK with state-owned water providers, such as Scotland. Yes, the charges there are slightly lower, but we're not talking about substantial sums here.

I think it would be fair to say that your life experience and social upbringing is far removed from mine . I was brought up on benefits in a damp squalid council house in a very poor area ...a pit village during the early 60s .
You mention Sainsburys .....I have never been into a Sainsburys store or Marks & Spencer's to shop . That was always seen as a privilege of the extremely wealthy and still is in many areas of dire need. As for car production ...we don't have one anymore . We are the mule for others and coincidentally all the cars I have ever bought have come from the local car auctions . My food shopping has always been from the cheapest discount store so I would argue that my ability to fairly assess the current state of value for money provided by the utility companies is far more finely tuned and acute than perhaps yours is ....
The billions of pounds profit made by this array of service providers (some of which are foreign owned ) would be better put back into the NHS , and other worthy causes . Currently what we are seeing is this money be put into shareholders many of which already have bulging pockets . The whole situation is a national disgrace . Greed and wealth have always ruled this country , but at no time in our history has the gap ever been wider . The lack of compassion shown by you and others of a similar ilk typical of what is wrong in our society . Your lives are dominated by power wealth and greed.
I affectionately call the situation " The BMW and Mercedes Benz owners club " because for the most part that is their sole focus in life , along with the block paved driveway .
If however you've spent a quarter of a century living well below the poverty line and have struggled simply to feed your self then it fine tunes your overall perceptions and knowledge about life . You cease to have an opinion about things but are simply controlled by the pocketful of small change you have in your pocket until payday . Sainsburys .......You're a bloody laugh .!!

1, competency of the government,
2, availability of competition.
3, necessity of the service to the public
4, scale/efficiency of purchasing power

You cant make one judgement without taking the individual scenario and running it through a number of factors to decide if it would be improved or harmed by privatization.

Generally speaking as a broadly conservative and collectivist individual, I am in against most privatization, as whilst they may serve individuals in the country well, they tend to make the state and the country as a whole weaker.

For any provider of any sort of service, I believe incentives should be properly aligned to their purpose. That means the better you do your job and satisfy the interests of your customer, the more you should be rewarded. I think privatisation with regulation is usually the most effective way to achieve this. Due to the profit incentive, private companies are likely to provide a more efficient service, whilst independent regulation can address the risk that they might profit from exploiting their customers.

Although it might seem sacrilegious to say so, I think this also applies to services such as healthcare and education. In their current state, where the government pretty much has a monopoly on the provision of service, they're always going to be underfunded and overstretched. There needs to be a greater incentive for them to provide an outstanding service as opposed to just cutting costs.

(Original post by Chaz254)
Capitalism dictates privatisation is better. Private companies have a better incentive to offer a high-quality good or service due to the profit incentive.

Capitalism dictates a lot of things, that doesnt mean its right though...
I would strenuously disagree with your last point though. As we have seen time after time ad infinitum private companies regularly engage in thoroughly deceitful practices and embrace illegality to bring them an advantage at the expense of their customer base/investors.

(Original post by L i b)
Transport to work, food to eat, homes to live in, places to socialise...

Presumably you think we should be nationalising Sainsbury's and car production.

So has investment, water cleanliness, network pressure, level of service (ie, avoiding the water supply being cut off to homes), efficiency (in terms of wasted water) and so on.

You can look at water charges in parts of the UK with state-owned water providers, such as Scotland. Yes, the charges there are slightly lower, but we're not talking about substantial sums here.

I think the privatisers assumed the water companies would remain listed on the LSE where the regulator could keep a close eye on them... now the water companies are being bought up by obscure private equity firms from all over the world.
Theoretically the water industry is regulated to allow a modest profit to be made after the running expenses, investment in infrastucture etc. have been paid for but at least one offshore private equity owned company has apparently decided it would be cheaper to not maintain it's infrastructure, take whopping profits instead and treat the fines for pollution as a cost of doing business. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0931hl5

(Original post by Joinedup)
I think the privatisers assumed the water companies would remain listed on the LSE where the regulator could keep a close eye on them... now the water companies are being bought up by obscure private equity firms from all over the world.
Theoretically the water industry is regulated to allow a modest profit to be made after the running expenses, investment in infrastucture etc. have been paid for but at least one offshore private equity owned company has apparently decided it would be cheaper to not maintain it's infrastructure, take whopping profits instead and treat the fines for pollution as a cost of doing business. http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0931hl5

That said, I wouldn't write off the successes of privatisation either.

I'll admit these things, where there are essentially monopolies in different regions, are hardly great models of constructive free market capitalism.

(Original post by Johnny English)
The billions of pounds profit made by this array of service providers (some of which are foreign owned ) would be better put back into the NHS , and other worthy causes.

And the complete decimation of private enterprise, innovation and the sort of advances that a market economy drive would kill off the progress in our economy that you take for granted every day.

Currently what we are seeing is this money be put into shareholders many of which already have bulging pockets . The whole situation is a national disgrace

People pay these companies because they provide a service that they want. I'd also point out those shareholders include people with low incomes, people who hold private pensions, those who have invested in supporting new and innovative businesses when there were significant risks to their investment: the whole spectrum basically.

Greed and wealth have always ruled this country , but at no time in our history has the gap ever been wider .

What gap? Because if you look at any measure of inequality, it's gone down (albeit slightly) in recent years: in the main, however, it's been fairly static for 30 years.

The lack of compassion shown by you and others of a similar ilk typical of what is wrong in our society . Your lives are dominated by power wealth and greed.

You do appreciate I hope that I believe your politics would have working people living in slums and eating rotten bread from a state-controlled provider, feeding us with propaganda about how great society is while you have to bribe doctors in hospitals to provide basic medical care. Simply dismissing people who look to the evidence that only free market capitalism has really improved the lot of the average and poorest people in our society as greedy is cheap and daft.

If however you've spent a quarter of a century living well below the poverty line and have struggled simply to feed your self then it fine tunes your overall perceptions and knowledge about life . You cease to have an opinion about things but are simply controlled by the pocketful of small change you have in your pocket until payday . Sainsburys .......You're a bloody laugh .!!

You're right in that I don't think politics should solely be at the service of the very poorest in society: we need politics that transcend class boundaries - politics that say when as many do well as possible, we all do well.

But I would at least like you to acknowledge that many of the things you do have: free education, free healthcare, the assurance of a pension to keep you from destitution in your old age, those luxury items you do have - they all come about from the work, reward and economic participation of others.

It's not for me to make assumptions about how you live your life (although, of course, you have about me) but these things are true of each and every one of us in this society. You're writing off the advances that we make every day for the promise of the moon on a stick: I'm afraid, if you ever got your way, you'd be very disappointed indeed.